Paul Craney: Legislative lockstep is bad news for the public

Monday

May 5, 2014 at 4:10 PM

“House members have been marginalized, dissent discouraged and decision-making centralized in (Speaker Robert) DeLeo's inner circle.” This was said by former state Rep. Charles Murphy, D-Burlington, when he resigned his position as House majority whip in 2011.

Paul CraneyMassachusetts Fiscal Alliance

“House members have been marginalized, dissent discouraged and decision-making centralized in (Speaker Robert) DeLeo’s inner circle.” This was said by former state Rep. Charles Murphy, D-Burlington, when he resigned his position as House majority whip in 2011.

For some, Murphy’s words are another reason to run for public office and change the stalemate on Beacon Hill. For others, they’re a reminder that change is impossible and that the longstanding culture of the institution is stronger than any minority’s determination to alter it.

Last week, the House passed the Speaker’s budget by a vote of 148-2, with only state Rep. Jim Lyons, R-Andover, and Marc Lombardo, R-Billerica, voting against it. Included in the 148 were the liberal and conservative wings of the Democratic Party along with the minority leader and over 90 percent of his caucus. Together, they voted to implement the Speaker’s spending plan for the following year and everything that goes along with it.

The near-unanimous vote in favor of final passage should not be taken as a sign that the budget is worthy of near-universal praise. The budget’s baselines were built on the hundreds of millions in tax increases passed in last year’s budget over considerably stronger opposition. Although Massachusetts continues to be one of the most indebted states per capita, the budget included an increase to state spending over the last year. Still worse, it was balanced due in part to the fact that it used more money from the rainy day fund to cover the current costs. Leadership moreover insisted on a gag order for 30 percent of the budget which prohibited amendments and debate on welfare, local aid and education.

Ultimately, these problems didn’t faze most lawmakers. Some said they voted for it because it didn’t increase taxes; others were satisfied because a handful of their amendments had been included. Most likely, some voted for it now, knowing they will vote against the final budget that results from bargaining between the House and Senate.

Any observer of this year’s budget process will realize that Murphy’s words, spoken three years ago, remain true today. So far, only the governor and the speaker have proposed a budget for Massachusetts’ 6.6 million residents. There are 154 members of the House of Representatives and 11 candidates running for governor, all of whom have the opportunity to offer another plan. Those who believe that the status quo could be significantly improved owe the commonwealth an alternative.

Decision-making cannot continue to be centralized in the speaker’s office, no matter the speaker. It has to reflect the input of many. In 2009, U.S. Rep. Paul Ryan, R-Wisc., recognized this. That year, while in the minority in Congress and at the height of President Obama’s popularity, Ryan proposed an initial version for a Republican budget.

In an op-ed in the Wall Street Journal, Ryan noted that as “the opposition party, we believe this moment must be met by offering the American people a different way forward. …” There he outlined the Republican budget in five categories: deficit/debt, spending, energy, entitlements and tax reform. Americans understood what a Republican Congress would look like and rewarded them a year later. Whatever your views on the specifics of his proposal, Ryan at least provided a basis for comparing and contrasting his own vision with those of others.

Liberals in the Legislature should propose their own budget. Conservative Democrats should be coming together and displaying how a modern-day “Party of JFK” would govern. Republicans, if they ever want to grow their ranks in Massachusetts and in the Legislature, must learn how to differentiate themselves.

Their budget, like the Ryan budget, should have a unique set of ideas that draw voters in. Legislative Republicans cannot wait for the next Republican governor to lead them; they need to set their own course.

Paul D. Craney is the executive director of Massachusetts Fiscal Alliance. Follow him on Twitter @PaulDiegoCraney.